GitHub|Since 2007
Wptr Lab

DEIONOSvsMittwaldDE

Head-to-head hosting performance comparison based on real test data

Test Date: 2/23/2026

IONOS
WPTR Score1938 ms
Rank#541
TTFB701ms
Time to 1MB456ms
Score1938
LCP1101ms
FCP901ms
Mittwald
WPTR ScoreWinner1700 ms
Rank#496
TTFB204ms
Time to 1MB604ms
Score1700
LCP604ms
FCP404ms

Our Verdict

Mittwald wins with 204ms TTFB (vs IONOS's 701ms)

TTFB Breakdown (Connection Phases)

PhaseIONOSMittwaldWinner
DNS Lookup89ms49msMittwald
TCP Connection206ms57msMittwald
TLS Handshake338ms58msMittwald
Server Processing211ms86msMittwald
Total TTFB844ms250msMittwald

Technology & Security Features

IONOS

Server/CDNApache
HSTS Enabled
Brotli Compression Disabled
HTTP/3 (QUIC) Disabled
Page Size611.3 KB

Mittwald

Server/CDNUnknown
HSTS Enabled
Brotli Compression Disabled
HTTP/3 (QUIC) Disabled
Page Size154.3 KB
1/3
IONOS Security Features
1/3
Mittwald Security Features

TTFB Comparison Over Time

Understanding the Metrics

WPTR Score: Wptr Lab Real-Load Score: (Time to 1MB x 2.4) + TTFB. Raw server & network performance (Lower is better).
TTFB: Time to First Byte - How fast the server responds
Time to 1MB: Time to 1MB - Time taken to download 1MB of data (lower is better)
LCP: Largest Contentful Paint - When main content loads
FCP: First Contentful Paint - When first content appears
Score: Overall performance score (0-100)

A Note on Hosting Selection

While TTFB and performance metrics are important indicators, choosing the right hosting provider involves many other factors: security measures, customer support quality, uptime guarantees, scalability options, and pricing structure. Academic research emphasizes that a balanced approach considering all these aspects leads to better long-term outcomes.

Chizhov, A., & Fesenko, A. (2025). Web hosting companies' client solutions: A study of a strategic standpoint. Corporate & Business Strategy Review. doi.org/10.22495/cbsrv6i1art14

Data in this comparison is obtained through independent tests using our TTFB Checker tool.